Derek 2.0

Like they say about broken clocks? What were the other polling firms saying? As I said, I don't follow them directly.

Perhaps, but from watching some of the coverage (CBC), at the start after polls closing, the mood was that it was expected to be a tight minority either way and not determined until late in the evening or early morning…..It seemed it was over rather fast……AFAIK, nobody predicted this type of shellacking.

I’ll stick with my prior Friday afternoon prediction from months ago…perhaps not tomorrow, but soon. Simply put, as I said months ago, the invoice for our next level of partnership dues is in the mail.

As someone that has no dog in it, and though a small and large “C” conservative but never too impressed by Hudak, I take two things from tonight’s results: 1. Based on this election, and the previous Alberta and BC campaigns, this further confirms my conviction that political polling shares the same level of validity as that of Astrology. 2. PC Premier Davis had Trudeau… Liberal Premier Peterson had Mulroney….Rae had Campbell….Harris had Chrétien…Eves, Paul Martin…….and McGuinty and now Wynne will have Harper for some time to come.

I see a difference between linking an individuals actions to such a tag and casting a wide net over those that suffer from various severities of mental illness. Obviously casting all those suffering from mental illness as potential “deranged killers” would be as morally bankrupt as any other prejudiced catch-all.

Exactly……..we have a Tesla and a 3500 diesel pick-up….best of both worlds, and I agree to some extent with Tim, I wouldn’t (yet) want an electric pick-up to go hunting up in the interior……But for a commuter, grocery picker upper, Sunday driving, electric in my view is the future.

My wife’s return daily commute is ~60km and she hooks it up to the charger usually Friday night with ~40-50% left on the batteries……Yeah there are charging stations popping up, but with the adaptor you can charge (much slower though) into any regular outlet……..For example, we spent a week over on the Island visiting family (and showing it off) and topped it up (when it got to about 30% charge) for the trip home…..It’s quite impressive, but I do expect the batteries to wear and reduce performance with age.

It’s not cheap, with tax and some interest on our line of credit, we figure it was just shy of 130k…..With that said, when dirt burning cars first came out, I’d imagine they were comparatively expensive….I’m sure they’ll come down eventually. But even with the cheaper ones on the market today, you have to factor the cost of recharging versus gas over the life of the car (much like the F-35 )

That's how my wife explains the two speeding tickets she's got with it.......the car clearly need sound effects

That’s a good point……We had the charging port installed in our garage, but the car does come with adaptor that plugs into a regular 110 wall socket….We figured the actually increase in our bi-monthly hydro bill is equivalent to running our clothes dryer twice as often……still far cheaper then feeding the Caddy 92... I was sceptical at first, thinking electric cars would only be slightly better then golf carts, but our’s has over 400hp and has not a problem handling the sea-sky hwy..

But I’m talking big picture……Does a large V8 SUV have a greater negative impact on the ecosystem then a Tesla charged with Hydro?

We live in Greater Vancouver……we hardly ever get shovel worthy snow……

To clarify then using myself as an example: In your view, if I fully acknowledge my prior contributions from my previous account (“Derek L”) there is no problem? As you’re well aware, on my return, once personal messaging was enabled I contacted both you and Greg via PM stating who I was (and of course I reused my prior email and I assume IP) and my desire to return. As such, I would think from an administrative point of view, this is complying with your above stated desire for past acknowledgment. As to other members, as far as I know, those that belonged to the forum during my previous membership are well aware of the connection between this and the past account….hardly any intended subterfuge to say the least. As for newer members that joined after my departure, all I can suggest is full acknowledgement that this account and the one pervious (“Derek L”) is the same person with interests in namely firearms laws/politics and defence procurement/the F-35.……..Good enough?

Agreed, but said salt can also be used to rim the glasses for the tequila….just saying.

Do you have any data, up or down, to prove that assertion that charging a Tesla with hydroelectricity has no net “Green benefit”? Even with the inclusion of the eventual replacement of the batteries, I’d very much like to see the net impact on the environment of running a Tesla versus a Cadillac SUV for say a 5-10 year period

How successful can one be not paying off a Mexican cop? Like I said, it's a privately owned forum, not a Democratic society with rules and fairness…It‘s more a Junta…simply put, Charles isn’t (nor should he be in fairness) accountable to anyone but the site owner…..that of course, I’d both hope and expect, would change if any of or all the forum members actually paid for this site…..but we don’t. As such, we can stay and accept that members will disappear form time to time and that Charles won’t be held to account, or we can cross the proverbial river late at night for somewhere else. That’s the way I see it.

Is there a point? It appears, in this tiny microcosm that is MLW, arguing debating with you on such matters is akin to pleading your defense to a policeman in Tijuana. In other words, spending time doing so in a logical manner is utterly useless and a waste when confronted with an official that both interprets and implements the rules based on how he see’s the wind blow. As has been said many times, this is clearly a privately owned forum, as such, your website, your rules.

That’s what I would lean towards…..my parents recently paid just shy of 10k to have their asphalt driveway resurfaced……I’d have to wonder if homeowners in their late 70s and early 80s would ever realistically see a benefit in a retrofit……..Maybe installed on new homes, with the cost incorporated into the purchase price…….

It does seem like it would be rather expensive on a National/Provincial/Municipal scale……. Good point.

I recently saw this proposal: Now as I understand, building such roads will have an initial outlay four times that of conventional roads. Now if the claims on potential energy generation are true, how long to see a return on investment? Even on a smaller scale, like a personal driveway, if one was to pay out of pocket to install such a driveway, what’s the timeframe till the reduction in personal electric/power bills pays for both the investment and upkeep? I might not fully understand the science, but on the surface (pun intended), it’s at the very least an interesting idea…..So will this be a technological fad or is there some validity to this proposal?

Which one?

That’s the least of the RAN’s concerns…..as demonstrated by current testing aboard American LHDs…….What would have to be determined first is how many aircraft and in what fashion the RAN intended to operate. If they intended to operate a small number of aircraft (~4-6) and as how the USMC operates it Harriers (and soon to be F-35Bs) aboard USN LHDs then required alterations would be minimal. Now if they intended to operate 12+ plus aircraft, in a sustained fashion like a American/French/British/Italian carrier the ships as current would need a whole host of alterations: Upgrades to their air traffic control radars, possibly the main 3D search radar, additions to the ships flight control operations center, additions to maintenance and weapons storage and ultimately a handful of AEW/AWACS helicopters and an additional 1 or 2 combined stores replenishment ships. Based on precedence (HMAS Melbourne) the Australians would mimic the United States Marines and operate a smaller number of F-35Bs in combination with the already planned rotary wing assets…..my opinion of course.

No game, just a question......Are you looking for what the RAAF/RAN would require to operate F-35Bs off of the Canberra class? Or that the Australians are even looking?

What cite are you looking for?

Yes indeed, and of course, the RAAF purchase of the Super Hornet was a replacement for the ageing F-111 fleet, which after retired by the USAF, became a "pig" (pun intended) to maintain.......lessons others should heed if they subscribe to purchasing a bastard fleet.